Shame on CNN, liberals…and me

I wrote the following in my column yesterday, and I owe everyone an apology.

“The questions were fair, and not designed simply to humiliate republicans. I genuinely felt that CNN actually failed to get it wrong this time.”

I was not aware that several questions were planted by left wing activists.

However, the fact that the blogosphere lit up immediately says to me that no damage was done. So while they failed to humiliate the republicans, I was wrong to say they did not try. They remain the Chirac/Clinton/Communist News Network, and will continue to rot in the ratings for it.

I am disgusted with CNN and the liberals that have infected that network like a virus. I am also quite displeased with myself. I am my own toughest critic, and will publicly flog myself in the blogospere’s equivalent of the town square shortly.

First, the liberal media must simply stop it. It is not that the media is liberal. It is that the media is dishonest. To be more blount, most media organizations are lying, weaselly, phony (redacted), from Dan Rather and Mary Mapes trying to hijack the 2004 election with “fake but accurate” memos, to Carole Simpson finally admitting that she was a liberal shill. Yes, this is the same Carole Simpson in 1992 who looked at former President Bush in a debate and snidely said, “well, Mr. Education President?” This is what liberals refer to as a moderator, and the former President, gracious to the end, insisted on unilateral disarmament against those who wished him harm.

The questions from the You-Tube republican debate were supposed to be asked by people choosing between the various republican candidates. Apparently there were supporters of Edwards, Obama and Hillary that were allowed to ask questions.

Some see this as no big deal. These people are called liberals, many of whom could not care less about integrity. Bill Clinton actually lied, George W. Bush did not, but not in their world. The ends justify the means. So trying to cheat in a debate is just seen as their normal modus operandi.

Others feel that since the questions themselves were good, there is no big deal. I personally did not have a problem with the questions, although the brigadier general should not have been allowed to filibuster afterwards. CNN let him ramble. Other people feel that this was an issue of disclosure. As long as the people were upfront about who they were supporting, they could go ahead and ask their questions.

No. The questioners should not have been allowed to ask questions at all. For those who feel that since this is a democracy, anyone can ask anything, they are wrong. Political parties are clubs. Unless you are a member, you do not get to play in the club, be it the Mickey Mouse Club (aka the democrats) or a private golf club.

This was a republican primary debate. The people who should have been allowed to ask questions should have been restricted to those who were open to voting for one of the republican candidates.

I should absolutely not be allowed to ask a question at a democratic party debate because I am absolutely positive that I am not voting for any of the democratic candidates. I am closeminded on this issue. I have decided to vote for the republican nominee. Therefore, allowing me to ask a question at a democratic party debate would detract from allowing them to pick their nominee. The general election is one thing. I cannot vote in a closed democratic primary, and I should have zero say in helping them winnow their own field.

I have met Giuliani, McCain, Romney and Thomson, and have asked questions of all of them. However, at a republican debate, even I would not be sure if I should ask a question because I haver already committed to Mr. Giuliani. Perhaps if I rationalize the fact that I am looking at the others as Vice Presidential nominees, I can ask them questions that way. I would tread very respectfully.

It is about integrity. While it has not happened yet, the open primary in New Hampshire is ripe for abuse. If Hillary pulls far ahead, what is to stop democrats from crossing over and flooding the republican vote total with votes for Tancredo or Rupaul? If republicans choose to do so, they can flood the democratic primary with votes for Kucinich. Just because this has not happened yet does not mean it cannot and will not happen.

The democrats should have 100% of the say in who their nominee is, and the same with the republicans. By CNN allowing committed liberals infiltrate…yes infiltrate…a republican debate…is at best inept…and at worst sinister.

CNN is pleading ineptness because it is better to be seen as stupid than as crooked. As of now there is no evidence that CNN deliberately tried to go Rather-Mapes and engage in sabotage. There is no evidence that the Clintons plotted this. However, such thought processes are no longer farfetched. So even if CNN was merely incompetent, the question then becomes…how could this happen?

The amount of effort that it took bloggers to blow this scandal up was almost zero. CNN would have had to do no research whatsoever. This is like pushing a drug to market because it has a pretty color, safety and side effects be d@mned. How many times do liberal news organizations have to shatter their reputations before nothing is left? Whether it is the Jayson Blair Times, the Rather-Mapes imbroglio, or the CNN planted questions debacle, the fourth estate is despised. This is dangerous because if people give up on the media, it will allow politicians such free reign that they will be unchecked. Forget George W. Bush. A really great parallel would be LBJ and the Gulf of Tonkin. If the media is automatically seen as lying, then the politicians will be seen as telling the truth. This can truly threaten democracy.

Some cynical republicans might be delighted by this CNN debacle and self immolation. This is a mistake. It hurts us all, and a greater good requires an honest media, not an emasculated media. However, the goal is not to destroy and eliminate the media. It is to get it to simply stop lying, stop being lazy, and stop letting liberal bias poison their organizations. Fox News does not thrive because it is conservative. Many people who watch Fox News are not republicans. People watch Fox News because they believe they are getting a story not swimming in leftist bias. Yes, it is conservative by comparison, but most moderates are conservative compared to the Trotskeyites at the other networks.

A coworker of mine felt that this is a non-issue, because subterfuge is part of the game. I then played Socrates with him and proposed a scenario. I find out a book club has hot women in attendance. I pretend to be interested in the books they are reading so that I can enter the book club, get to know these women, and hopefully get to give them the ketchup bottle treatment. My coworker had no problem with this. His viewpoint is that all is fair in love and war.

No way. This is fraud. It lacks integrity. A club is set up for a certain purpose, and my stealth mission totally violates that purpose. Even if it does not violate the letter of the law, since nothing may ban me from joining, it certainly violates the spirit of the law. It is ethically flawed.

Lying is wrong. Medical ethicists have even rejected the concept of the “therapeutic lie.” Encouraging a Machiavellian “ends justify the means” approach destroys everybody.

I believe our system of politics is poisoned because too many on the left believe that lying is acceptable for a greater good. Republican say “these are the rules. These are the laws.” Democrats say, “but if the law is unfair, you have to break it.”

This is how Gavin Newsom can perform gay marriages. He believes the law is wrong, so he just breaks it. This is how Democrats can place candidates on the ballot in New Jersey and Minnesota after the deadline. They felt like it, so they did. This is how President Bush can be accused of stealing the 2000 election, when there was nothing he did that comes close to evidence of cheating. Irregularities occurred in Missouri, possibly costing John Ashcroft his job. Somehow the media did not have a problem with this. Going back to Gavin Newsome, gay marriage may or may not one day become the law of the land. If it becomes legal, those against it will not be able to stop the ceremonies. It is now illegal, and as painful as that is for some, change must be within the system. Otherwise, there is vigilantism.

The media has an obligation to report. Editorial pages can editorialize, but hard news organizations must offer a cold, detached, fair and even handed approach. If they are unable to do this, they must report their biases upfront.

I am a politically conservative blogger. I am biased. I vote republican. I am a fair person, but I am not balanced in my views. If I meet a liberal candidate, I will be respectful, but I will not lie to them or hide my affiliation. I value my brand. People who fiercely disagree with me know where I stand, and know that I am honest. It benefits my blog, and allows me to sleep well at night.

Yet I remain disappointed with myself for being guilty of the very things that I flayed CNN for with regards to this debate. CNN was lazy. Yet so was I.

Full disclosure: Giuliani is my first choice, McCain second. Only they can beat Hillary. I will vigorously support Romney or Thompson if they win the nomination, but think Hillary would beat them. Huckabee is being forced down republican throats by a liberal media that will later destroy him as a zealot in the general election. He is a good decent man that cannot win. Obama is a lightweight, Edwards is the strongest democrat in a general election (since Biden has no shot), and I am scared of Hillary the most. Yes, she can win, I want her the least of anyone.

As for my analysis, first of all, I am amazed at how differently other republicans viewed the debate. I stated that McCain won, Giuliani came in second, Thompson and Huckabee were neutral, and Romney was awful. Michelle Malkin saw it totally different from me, that Romney shined. Frank Luntz, a very respected pollster who conducts focus groups, stated that his group loved Fred Thompson and Romney, and thought Giuliani and McCain were awful. I hope I am not clouded by bias, but I did not see what Mr. Luntz or Ms. Malkin saw.

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/30/cnns-dont-ask-dont-tell-policy/

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11302007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/cnns_screwup_219339.htm

Maybe I am just missing the pulse of my own party. Michelle Malkin is a hardliner on illegal immigration. I am more of a “Wall Street Journal Conservative.” Is Lou Dobbs really the pulse of the republican party? I do not see it, but maybe I am the one who is blind. To me, cutting taxes and killing terrorists is what matters. Do that many people think illegal immigration, abortion and gay marriage matter more?

I ask this because if the people truly are screaming, and I am not hearing them, then I am failing as a blogger. I think the hordes of people ready to take to the streets on these issues is overblown, the same way the Rupaul supporters are overblown. Tom Tancredo has about 2% below zero in the polls. What about the “Buchanan Brigades?” In 1996 he won New Hampshire, but 4 years later was an asterisk.

I normally feel that I represent mainstream republican viewpoints, but after spending time criticizing the left for shoddy journalism, I completely missed the story of the insincere questioners at this debate. I did not bother to verify these people. It did not occur to me. I reported, but did not analyze or investigate. I did not scratch the surface.

Nothing…and nobody…should be taken at blind faith. Yes, some people are brilliant. I long ago accepted at face value the commentary of Charles Krauthammer, Thomas Sowell, and Ralph Peters. Yet blind following makes me one of the sheeple. I accepted that the debate was fair, and missed something that looks painfully obvious in hindsight. I know what people say about hindsight, but I still missed it.

I need to be a better blogger. I guess that is what separates me from CNN and the rest of the human disasters in the media. Unlike the leftinistras, I actually care more about my integrity than in speed. I can win without compromising what is right. I allow sincere criticism of my work, and do not confuse openmindedness with vaccilation or lack of conviction.

What CNN and the leftist media do is disgusting. They destroy themselves, and corrode society. If I am going to be part of the solution, I have to be more willing to analyze things with more depth. I am far from perfect, but I know I am on the right track. People trust me, and when I look in the mirror, I know I am doing my best. It is not good enough yet, but it will be.

eric

60 Responses to “Shame on CNN, liberals…and me”

  1. Jersey McJones says:

    Yeah, I heard the Right is all up in arms about all this. Aparently Malkin went realy nuts. I fail to see any lies or decpetion in the matter. They guy asked a question of the candidates. Big deal.

    JMJ

  2. steveegg says:

    If there had been disclosure, something that was singularily applied to Grover Norquist, there wouldn’t have been much of an issue. The fact that CNN selectively applied disclosure, and notably did not apply it to someone they invited down to St. Pete, while proclaiming that the questioners represented a “cross-section of America” speaks volumes about CNN.

  3. steveegg says:

    Eric, do you want some fresh liberal meat? I could direct the folks from Salon over here 🙂

    I’m actually getting all kinds, from the at-least-somewhat-thoughtful to the blind repeater of 4-year-old faxes.

  4. mopenshaw says:

    CNN is also being absurdly disingenuous in simply not admitting they failed to check up on these people. I really think it is just an amazing display of media incompetance, brought on by liberal groupthink. The questions- actually aimed at fringe or really dated issues- seemed ‘mainstream’ to the media because they are deluded enough to think that’s where their political philosopy lies. It’s haow all their friends talk, so it must be ‘middle-of-the-road’.

    Really sad how these people isolate themselves from different thought patterns and philosophies. Don’t have enough logic and grey matter invested in their own viewpoints to take the strain.

  5. Chris Naron says:

    I think this thing was about half CNN instinctively trying to screw the GOP and half trying to tap into the “authenticity” of the YouTube culture. In other words, it’s not a conspircacy per se, but it should be and is yet another black mark on CNN.

    From our point of view, however, we need to hold the GOP accountable for stepping squarely in the steaming pile. Fred Thompson and Ron Paul got the highest marks from me simply because they seemed the least eager to participate.

  6. conhed says:

    eric,

    Do not bemoan your lack of analysis. You are not the only player on this side of the field, and no one can do it all. As a philosophical libertarian and a political conservative, I do not rely on a single source for my intellectual diet. I read Al jazeera and the NY Times as well as the WSJ and Fox news. One must, in order to determine the facts in any situation, even though the biases sometimes make this difficult (especially the first two of that group of news sources) to accomplish.

    I salute you for your forthright statement as to your bias, it is rare, and unknown for the left leaning crowd. Honesty is the best policy.

    Thanks for the link exchange, I have posted yours on my blog.

    Best wishes,

    conhed

  7. micky2 says:

    Its alright Eric.
    Maybe we should come up with a legislation to protect those that made a mistake once in while ? Maybe the moonbats would back you on it ?
    I know that is a assinine statement to an extent.
    But I’m sure you have the forgiveness of all who know exactly what you’re all about,
    and that is all that should matter.
    Carry on. No public flogging necessary buddy.

  8. micky2 says:

    Any flogging for that matter.

  9. Jersey McJones says:

    I don’t know what you guys are complaining about. He asked a question, the debators answered in a way the crowd liked. The only bad thing to come of it was when some in the crowd booed and made themselves look a little low-brow. If that’s what you’re complaining about, then look at yourselves and not CNN.

    JMJ

  10. micky2 says:

    JMJ said;
    ” don’t know what you guys are complaining about. He asked a question, the debators answered in a way the crowd liked. The only bad thing to come of it was when some in the crowd booed and made themselves look a little low-brow. If that’s what you’re complaining about, then look at yourselves and not CNN.”

    First theres this obvious BS with Kerr.
    Not only was Kerr’s Youtube submission aired, but he was introduced to the candidates and the audience on television and given a long opportunity to follow-up. CNN moderator Anderson Cooper asked Kerr, “Do you feel you got an answer to your question?”

    Kerr replied, “With all due respect, I did not get an answer from the candidates.” Then, Kerr gave a small lecture: “American men and women in the military are professional enough to serve with gays and lesbians. For 42 years, I wore the army uniform on active duty, in the Reserve, and also for the state of California. I revealed I was a gay man after I retired. Today, ‘don’t ask/don’t tell’ is destructive to our military policy. Every day, the Department of Defense discharges two people, not for misconduct, not for the unit cohesion.”

    { How many others in the audience got a chance to mouth off like that ?}

    CNN later apologized for the incident. “We regret this incident. CNN would not have used the general’s question had we known that he was connected to any presidential candidates,” said David Bohrman, CNN senior vice president and executive producer of the debate.

    ( Now anyone with a brain knows this a line of crap! CNN could Google anyone in a heartbeat , and any fool knows its standard practice for a news organization to do so)

    In a CNN interview on Thursday morning, Kerr denied he was used as a “plant” by the Clinton campaign at the Republican debate. He said he is only listed as a member of Clinton’s gay steering committee and his appearance was a “private initiative of my own.”

    CNN payed for his flight and accomedations ! Private my ass !

    None of the Republican candidates were asked any questions about education, healthcare or energy policy.

    I have right to complain Jersey without being looked at as anything other than a concerned American who wanted answers to the candidates standing on the issues.

    The crowd may have booed but at least they didnt rush the stage and prevent free speech as in the case with Columbia University.

  11. Jersey McJones says:

    “None of the Republican candidates were asked any questions about education, healthcare or energy policy.”

    Yeah, I didn’t like that either. But the GOP candidates don’t really like those questions either. Whatever. So, the GOPers got stuck with a bit of a hit job. Big deal. The fact is that the GOP doesn’t have a good relationship with homosexuality. That’s why so many of them are in the closet.

    JMJ

  12. micky2 says:

    JMJ Blurted;

    Yeah, I didn’t like that either. But the GOP candidates don’t really like those questions either. Whatever. So, the GOPers got stuck with a bit of a hit job. Big deal. The fact is that the GOP doesn’t have a good relationship with homosexuality. That’s why so many of them are in the closet.”

    Ha ! You got knocked down and even admitted you didnt like the fact that hey were not asked these questions and then you change it to another subject.
    So its OK because you think the gop doesnt like those questions ?
    What in the hell makes your prejudicial rear think that anyone is in the closet ?
    We have no problem with homosexuality, its you and the homosexuals that want to legislate morals and ethics pertaining to our free speech on the matter.

    You can come up with all the anti discrimination laws and movements you want.
    But you cant and never ever will legislate morals or ethics.
    Their will still be racism, bigotry and discrimination no matter what you do.
    these are the choices people make due to upbringing or events in their life.
    We as parents can only teach our young that its wrong.
    But To have the government try to tell me how I should act or treat others is wrong.

  13. micky2 says:

    By the way, save yourself Jersey.
    Its not a Hillary story, its a nut low on meds story.

  14. greg says:

    eric wrote: “This was a republican primary debate. The people who should have been allowed to ask questions should have been restricted to those who were open to voting for one of the republican candidates.”

    If it was a private party just for Republicans, why then broadcast it on a public cable TV channel? If they want to limit those who can participate, and you would have to wonder why any party — liberal or conservative — that is trying to grow and expand their base would want to, then have it on closed-circuit TV or something like that.

    Over the course of my life I have voted for Ronald Reagan twice and Bill Clinton twice and am proud of all four votes. Like many Americans, sometimes I vote for the Republican and sometimes I vote for the Democrat, and sometimes I vote for the Libertarian. Democratic candidates form “Republicans for …” committees and Republicans form “Democrats for …” committees every election cycle.

    If we want to create a better society, whatever that society is to look like, we have GOT to stop the demonization of our opponents. To tell me that I am not eligible to participate in a “Republican” debate open and broadcast to the public because I am not a Republican tells me that I probably shouldn’t be voting for a Republican, either.

    And if the Republican candidates can’t handle a question from a liberal or from a Democrat, then I have to really doubt their ability to be president of the United States.

  15. micky2 says:

    I dont care who asks the questions.
    But the questions must not be stacked in one favor or the other.
    Its not a question of who can handle what.
    But it is a question of CNNs handling of the whole thing and honest media.

    The conservative candidates should take questions from citizens who are having trouble deciding between one conservative or another.
    Seeing how most Americans have already decided which party they will vote for, but not necessarily the candidate of that party, it makes no sense for a dem to ask a con about an issue when its more than likely the dem will never vote con anyway.

    But yes, there should still be a balance that should be selected randomly, not selectivly (AKA CNN)
    Please read post #10 for some insight.

    Greg wrote;
    “And if the Republican candidates can’t handle a question from a liberal or from a Democrat, then I have to really doubt their ability to be president of the United States.”

    They answerd the questions.

  16. opit says:

    Chill Eric. The United States has two conservative parties. End of story. You get nothing else when both are beholden to corporate sponsorship to pay for the costs of public exposure.
    Think I’m wrong ? Try this on for size. The right thinks companies should not be unnecessarily restrained. The ‘left’ thinks government should not impose unnecessary restrain on people.
    Saying one is for ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ while decrying balance and accountability means one can mouth the words without understanding them.

  17. mopenshaw says:

    “And if the Republican candidates can’t handle a question from a liberal or from a Democrat, then I have to really doubt their ability to be president of the United States.”

    How about the reverse? The Dems proved they wouldn’t even risk it by refusing to debate with Fox as a sponsor I guess that indicates who should be elected.

  18. micky2 says:

    Piece of cake and right on !

  19. mopenshaw says:

    Opit, we just don’t have a party far enough left for you; possibly the Socialists Workers Party could be built up with you and your like-minded brethern. I am NOT joking; the anti-war left has no real home since all the Dems are interested in is raw power and will cast you off, just as the GOP casts off the Religious Right after the elections.

  20. micky2 says:

    opit said;

    “You get nothing else when both are beholden to corporate sponsorship to pay for the costs of public exposure.
    Think I’m wrong ? Try this on for size. The right thinks companies should not be unnecessarily restrained. The ‘left’ thinks government should not impose unnecessary restrain on people.
    Saying one is for ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ while decrying balance and accountability means one can mouth the words without understanding them.”

    You get nothing else ? What country are you from ?

    Our countrys freedom gives us the balance Opit.
    And by the way, we are not nor were we ever intended to be a democracy.

    You most certainly mouthed without understanding

  21. opit says:

    I’m not the one who throws that term around. Representative government and effective aristocracy are not mysterious concepts.
    Good thing I’m neither Dem nor U.S. citizen. Not that things are any different to the north ; except I’m not considered left-wing. It’s been considered a poor idea for a long time for the neighbours ( us ) to have a ready supply of modern toys.Besides, that leaves our researchers available for US use.
    Anti-war ? At least have the honesty to call it what it is : target practice.

  22. micky2 says:

    Modern toys ? So yours is old ?
    Better turn yours off, its probably chipping your teeth.
    I cant understand a thing you’re saying.

    OPIT said;
    “Anti-war ? At least have the honesty to call it what it is : target practice”

    You wouldnt by any chance have a bullseye on your forehead , would you ?.

  23. opit says:

    Funny. Want to take your chances on finding out the hard way ?

  24. Jersey McJones says:

    The Dems didn’t do the Fox debate because Fox is not a real news network. It would be like having a National Enquirer debate, or a Worldnetdaily debate. Silly outlets like these should be avoided by serious “adult” candidates.

    As for the loony at the Clinton HQ, Micky, the story still isn’t in yet, but it does look like a random loony story. Fox should enjoy that. It’s right up their alley.

    JMJ

  25. mopenshaw says:

    That’s right; Opit is a Canadian, telling us how we need to run our country. You know how at risk Canadiens remain in the world; you never know when some crazed muslim fanatic will nuke Ottawa. They actually build their office buildings smaller there out of fear of airplane strikes, I imagine.

    Jersey returns the laughable claim the Foxs is not a ‘real news network’; I’m sure he’d claim MSNBC (Chris Matthews isn’t National Enquirer-esqe??) is. Problem is, the votes are in for the cable networks and Fox outdraws them all. The viewing public disagrees with you Jersey, and- to save you from calling the viewing public idiots as liberal elitists tend to- I’ll point out that appealing to the majority is the process in this country.

  26. mopenshaw says:

    Forgot to close the bold.

  27. micky2 says:

    Opit, might be hard, but I’m an American conservative, and the job would get done.
    Unfortunatly we all talk alot of crap behind a keyboard.
    But with my training, if I met you in public and you challenged me. I would not raise a hand to you unless you made the first move.
    But if you do have a bullseye on your forehead, along with that mouth of yours, you wouldnt last long, not in my neighborhood.
    What amazes me is that you’re not even an American, so WTF ?
    I’ll tuck my testicles back in now and move on.

    At this point, Jersey McJones deserves more attention than you, although we are not exactly lovers, he does live here , and he’s a citizen

    JMJ said;
    The Dems didn’t do the Fox debate because Fox is not a real news network. It would be like having a National Enquirer debate, or a Worldnetdaily debate. Silly outlets like these should be avoided by serious “adult” candidates.”

    So these so called adult Dem candidates can go to CNN and get asked if its diamonds or pearls ?
    And have gay rights activist flown in on CNNs dime to ask questions of the cons ?

    You look stupid when you bash FOX jersey, but I guess you’ll never grow out of it. The childish thing about it is that you dont bash them really because they are a bad news outlet. You bash them because they dont lean left. At least be honest and adult enough to admit that.
    I went to youtube and pulled some questions which leave little room for doubt that CNN has an agenda. Many were “When did you stop beating your wife?” questions.
    One questioner asked what criminal penalties should be imposed against an aborting mother, not whether there should be criminal penalties but what they should be.
    Another question included the assumption that our invasion of Iraq had hurt America’s image in the world, especially the Muslim world, and asked what the candidates would do to repair it. The question implied the invasion was wrong.
    If our image has suffered, it is largely due to disgraceful Democratic slander against President Bush and the invasion. Are Democrats ever asked what would happen in Iraq if we were to follow their blind demands to immediatly withdraw our troops?

    Another rhetorical question suggested President Bush had given Vice President Dick Cheney too much power. This ongoing liberal myth wrongly implies that with many decisions the buck has not stopped with Bush but with Cheney. Insiders I know and trust flatly refute that notion, saying that President Bush has been absolutely in charge. It also contradicts the other liberal idea that Bush is a dictator who won’t listen to anyone.
    The question about gays in the military was crafted not to distinguish the candidates’ positions but to make Republicans look bigoted — period. And what could be more unprofessional than CNN encouraging and giviong extra time to the disgruntled retired gay general to lecture the candidates for failing to give the answer he preferred to his loaded, self-serving and mostly irrelevant question?

    As far blowing up Hillarys headquarters goes. Once I heard he was a diagnosed schizophrenic, the story was all the way in.
    Hey Jersey ! You cant get out this one, you were either to weary to debate me anymore.
    Or you were just as gulible as all the people you call idiots for watching fox, you jumped on it, hook line a sinker also. Like some Paris Hilton groupie.
    I had the TV on in the background I was typing and debating you, and never (swear to god) once turned around to even look at it while the WHOLE MEDIA (not just fox) got all lit up like you and ran with it.
    So the next time you tell me how you are so inclined to get better news than anyone because all you watch is C-Span, I wont believe you. I cant.
    Looks like you and FOX have more in common than you would like to admit.

  28. greg says:

    Jersey said: “The Dems didn’t do the Fox debate because Fox is not a real news network.”

    Substitute the “Jayson Blair Times” for Fox and you pretty much have eric’s argument about the New York Times.

    Lots of proposed debates don’t happen for various reasons. The difference between not having a Fox debate and the CNN debate is that the CNN debate actually took place, but more important is Micky2’s observation that the candidates did in fact answer the questions. The whole issue about planting questions is really rather silly and overblown, and it’s the commentators that seem most upset about it, not the candidates.

    But, in any event, complaining about who’s asking the questions and advocating restricting participants at a public forum to only those who are undecided about a Republican candidate just doesn’t make the Republican party look good and is counterproductive.

  29. opit says:

    Actually, Greg, the biggest problem isn’t the political theory so much as personnel. You can get programs to work in different ways. One of the oldest mottos is “Make a decision and make it work”. It’s the last part that’s bombing today. The head has been cut off of government.

  30. Jersey McJones says:

    Greg, c’mon man! Fox? Look, if I want to know about some teenager’s murder in Aruba or what OJ’s been up to these days or whether Hillary is going to turn us into the USSR, then I would watch Fox. I do watch Fox, of course, because I want to know what American “news” consumers are thinking in their little, O’Reilly-filled heads, but other than that… eh.

    I know it’s demeaning to some, but my point is a helluva lot stronger than the whole “Jason Blair Times” thingy. They did fire him, after all. By the very standards of those who decried Blair, there wouldn’t be a single personality on Fox “News” who could last a half-season. Fox is a joke. That doesn’t mean that the people who watch Fox are a joke, though: and that’s how to win them over – tell them it’s okay to watch Fox because it’s silly and fun, but not serious news.

    JMJ

  31. micky2 says:

    I watch them all , they are all the same with motives , tactics and agendas. If you guys realized this you wouldnt sound like a bunch juvenile butt wipes arguing about whos daddy can beat up whos daddy.
    The problem is that CNN got popped and wont just admit it or say “YEA! SO WHAT?”

    The reason CNN is on a negative roll lately is because most of the debates have been on their network.
    The libs just dont have the guts to enter a hostile room

  32. Jersey McJones says:

    “The libs just dont have the guts to enter a hostile room.”

    Now I call “Cow Frisbees.” If the GOP, and anyone on their side, had the %@!!s to debate the real left, they’d be laid in the dust. Bring it on.

    JMJ

  33. micky2 says:

    CNN gave it their best shot in this debate, and already the left has dinosaur egg on its face.
    When that didnt work Hillary payed some poor slob to dress up like a suicide bomber and get Jersey and the media all hot and botherd.
    Next week she’ll be up on some soap box crying about how we need socialized medicine to prevent mentally deranged closet libs who think they are cons from acting like suicide bombers.

    And by the way jersey, who said the room had to have conservatives in it ?
    I only said hostile.
    Better bring a box of tissues.

  34. micky2 says:

    Dems aint been winning too much of anything lately, except assclown awards.

  35. mopenshaw says:

    We debate them all the time, but the speed at which they generally sink to name calling and profanity in the place of logic and reason is quite astounding. By one study, George Carlin’s ‘7 words’ show up 18 times more often in leftist blogs and comments than in those by the right. Myself, I generally find that inversely reflective of the intellectual content.

    How often does the ‘real’ left disrupt speakers on the right on college campuses? That is not debate. And since the ‘real’ left candidates never seem to survive the primary process where they debate moderates and even the Democrat voters don’t agree with them enough to select them, they haven’t earned the right to debate in the general election.

  36. greg says:

    I didn’t say I agreed with eric’s position on the NY Times. I think it’s juvenile. Yeah, Fox is usually hard to take very seriously but they seem to be okay on handling straight news stories like a plane crash. It’s when Bill or Sean or any of their other commentators open their mouths that they and the network lose credibility as a serious news organization. Remember, ol’ Bill hosted one of those entertainment gossip shows before he went to Fox. He’s a celebrity/entertainer, sort of like Paris Hilton only uglier. He’s not a real journalist, but you have to admit, he does draw ratings.

    And, yes, the NY Times handling of Jayson Blair was far more ethical than anything we would see from Fox.

    Opit, I don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

  37. micky2 says:

    Jayson Blair, ethics and NYT all in one sentence ?
    Eric might see this as worse than profanity.

    Greg wrote;
    “Remember, ol’ Bill hosted one of those entertainment gossip shows before he went to Fox. He’s a celebrity/entertainer,”

    Greg, arent you an ordained priest ? I’m sure you believed in the tooth fairy or easter bunny or santa at one time , right ?.
    Bill is also a highly acclaimed journalist.
    Hes a professional journalist.
    Katie Couric is more of an entertainer, or Wolf Blitzer or Jack Crapperty, now they’re funny

    Check it out, hes way more than you think, you think?
    ——————————————————————————————————————–
    O’Reilly earned a masters degree in Broadcast Journalism from Boston University (where he attended school with shock jock Howard Stern) and another Master of Public Administration from Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government.

    Broadcasting career—————————————————————————————–
    ———————————————————————————————————————
    Bill O’Reilly in 1975 as the “Action Consumer trouble shooter” for ABC affiliate WNEP in Scranton, Pennsylvania. After graduating from Marist College, O’Reilly moved to Miami, Florida at age 21, where he taught English and history at Monsignor Pace High School for two years. After leaving Miami, O’Reilly returned to school, earning a M.A. in Broadcast Journalism from Boston University in 1976. While attending Boston University, he was a reporter and columnist for various local newspapers and alternative news weeklies, including The Boston Phoenix. O’Reilly did his broadcast journalism internship in Miami during this time, and was also an entertainment writer and movie critic for The Miami Herald.
    ———————————————————————————————————————
    O’Reilly’s early television news career included reporting and anchoring positions at WNEP-TV in Scranton, Pennsylvania, where he also reported the weather. At WFAA-TV in Dallas, Texas, O’Reilly was awarded the Dallas Press Club Award for excellence in investigative reporting. He then moved to KMGH-TV in Denver, Colorado where he won a Local Emmy Award for his coverage of a skyjacking. O’Reilly also worked for KATU-TV in Portland, Oregon, as well as TV stations in Hartford, Connecticut (WFSB-TV), and in Boston, Massachusetts.
    ———————————————————————————————————————
    In 1980, he anchored his own program on WCBS-TV in New York where he won his second Local Emmy for an investigation of corrupt city marshals. In 1982, he was promoted to the network as a CBS News correspondent and covered the wars in El Salvador and the Falkland Islands from his base in Buenos Aires, Argentina. He later left CBS over a dispute concerning the uncredited use in a report by Bob Schieffer of riot footage shot by O’Reilly’s crew in Buenos Aires during the Falklands conflict. (A 1998 novel by O’Reilly, Those Who Trespass: A Novel of Television and Murder, depicts a television reporter who has a similar dispute over a Falklands War report. The character proceeds to exact his revenge on network staff in a series of graphically-described murders.)
    ———————————————————————————————————————
    In 1986, O’Reilly joined ABC News as a correspondent for ABC World News Tonight.
    ———————————————————————————————————————
    In 1989, O’Reilly joined the nationally syndicated King World (now CBS) program Inside Edition, a tabloid/gossip television program in competition with A Current Affair. He started as senior correspondent and backup anchor for British TV host David Frost, and subsequently became the program’s anchor after Frost’s termination. In addition to being one of the first American broadcasters to cover the dismantling of the Berlin Wall, O’Reilly also obtained the first exclusive interview with murderer Joel Steinberg and was the first television host from a national current affairs program on the scene of the 1992 Los Angeles riots.
    ———————————————————————————————————————
    In 1995, O’Reilly was replaced by former NBC News and CBS News anchor Deborah Norville on Inside Edition. He then enrolled at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, where he received a master’s degree in Public Administration. After Harvard, he was hired by Roger Ailes, chairman and CEO of the then startup FOX News Channel, to anchor The O’Reilly Report. The show soon moved to a new time slot, and was renamed The O’Reilly Factor.
    ——————————————————————————————————————–
    O’Reilly’s radio program reaches 3.25 million-plus listeners and is carried by more than 400 radio stations.[11] Conservative magazine NewsMax’s “Top 25 Talk Radio Host” list selected O’Reilly to the #2 spot as most influential host in the nation
    ———————————————————————————————————————

    HES NOT A REAL JOURNALIST ? THE WHAT WOULD YOU CALL ALL THIS ?

  38. opit says:

    Greg Running around collecting online news takes up a lot of time. that’s why I didn’t get back sooner.
    From the standpoint of most here I’m a flamin’ commie – which would be hysterically funny were it not so stupid.
    What I’m saying is a Democratic Party/Republican Party choice is always a choice between supporters of the way things are – pretty much. The American people like things the way they are and see no reason to change.
    It’s happened anyway. Prime example is ‘Brownie’ and NOLA. The whole situation is still a rolling disaster, along with environmentalism and public services : unless you think the “health care system” for instance was unfairly attacked by say, the ‘Sicko’ show.The most common cause of American bankruptcy is medical procedures : a situation not tolerated elsewhere. Even GM is pissed off by the disproportionate expense it carries as a result of compulsory carriage of health benefits in an insurers’ wet dream.
    Cutting tax while spending like there’s no tomorrow to fund mercenary armies partly owned by the Prez and Vice. If the situation doesn’t stink enough to notice yet, give it a very short time. The economy is toast.

  39. micky2 says:

    OPIT wrote;
    “Cutting tax while spending like there’s no tomorrow to fund mercenary armies partly owned by the Prez and Vice. If the situation doesn’t stink enough to notice yet, give it a very short time. The economy is toast.”

    The revenues that tax cuts bring in by stimulating our free market through enabling us to bring dollars to the market place has value far greater than bending everyone over , OPIT.
    But of course A one dimensional thinker could never envision such a scenario taking place. Its less taxing (pun intended) on the mind to just hold out your hand.

  40. micky2 says:

    Opit , how the hell do you fix an economy by taxing the people ? Untill they have nothing left to contribute to the market ? That just plain stupid, period.
    Were getting bent over on gas and food ( no thanks to ethanol) and interest rates as it is right now and you kannucks think its better to bend us over some more?
    You’re probably use to this crap where you come from. Which brings up the question again as to why you care one bit at all , you dont live here.
    Our economy was just fine within a year after 911. And its been fine since then untill all these idiots went and took out ARMs on property thewy couldnt afford, and right now oil is scaring everyone.
    But you asked for numbers, here ya go. Make some coffee.

    http://aolsearch.aol.com/aol/search?encquery=ae68c1b34e0e9404ef4086f70920b3c3ba96621d2aeece21cc4be387c1ff3229&invocationType=keyword_rollover&ie=UTF-8

    http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/issueoftheweek/20070521/200/2185

    It was initially thought that aggregate demand was seriously affected, for while
    the existing data showed that GDP growth was low in the first half of 2001, data
    published in October showed that GDP had contracted during the 3rd quarter. This
    led to the claim that “The terrorist attacks pushed a weak economy over the edge into
    an outright recession.” We now know, based on revised data, this is not so. At the
    time of 9/11 the economy was in its third consecutive quarter of contraction; positive
    growth resumed in the 4th quarter. This would suggest that any effects from 9/11 on
    demand were short lived. While this may be true, several events took place before,
    on, and shortly after 9/11, that made recovery either more rapid than it might have
    been or made it possible to take place. First, the Federal Reserve had eased credit
    during the first half of 2001 to stimulate aggregate demand. The economy responds
    to policy changes with a lag in time. Thus, the public response may have been felt
    in the 4th quarter giving the appearance that 9/11 had only a limited effect. Second,
    the Federal Reserve on and immediately after 9/11 took appropriate action to avert
    a financial panic and liquidity shortage. This was supplemented by support from
    foreign central banks to shore up the dollar in world markets and limited the
    contagion of 9/11 from spreading to other national economies. Nevertheless, U.S.
    trade with other countries, especially Canada, was disrupted. While oil prices spiked
    briefly, they quickly returned to their pre-9/11 levels.

  41. greg says:

    Micky2, after seeing all the things Bill has apparently done, it seems to me he can’t hold a job …

  42. mopenshaw says:

    Greg, when your standup comedy routine goes on the road, send me the schedule. Oreilly’s working history is quite typical for the industry.

    Should we also discuss Brit Hume’s resume?

    Opit, suddenly health care is the big issue; right out of the Dems script that is scrambling to change the subject from their proven wrongheadedness on Iraq. Newsflash; the healthcare system has been a mess since the 70s at least; through all administrations- Republican and Democrat- and increasing government involvement only adds to the problem. Ask the Brits, who are leterally pulling their own teeth for lack of available care and the Canadiens who come to the States for cancer treatment and surgery. As one hwho was raised in a medical family, worked in hospital ancillary services for years and one whose son had 6 digit medical costs last year, I think I can speak on the subject with some experience.

    The basic problem in American medicine? A combination of government, insurance companies, and a suit-happy legal system has driven medicine into the uncaring hands of business managers rather than front-line doctors. This has also caused the doctors to begin to act more like businessmen than clinicians in self-defense. Solve that (which government will only make worse) and things can be fixed.

  43. micky2 says:

    Greg said;
    “Micky2, after seeing all the things Bill has apparently done, it seems to me he can’t hold a job …”

    I still blew your assinine claim that hes not a real journalist right out of the water, did it hurt pulling that ridiculously uneducated remark out of your rump?

    He cant hold a job? More like he rose to the top ratings in the country greg, give up the hate and use common sense alright ? Were all freeking grown men here, O.K?
    Theres opinionated and then just plain stupid hate.

  44. greg says:

    Relax, micky2, it was a joke. Yes, of course he has credentials but he long ago abandoned any sense of journalistic ethics or standards that would qualify him to be called a true journalist. He also played semi-pro and once tried out for the NY Mets but that doesn’t mean he’s still a baseball player.

  45. opit says:

    micky 2
    That your best shot ? Articles that dispute the wisdom of tax breaks ?

  46. micky2 says:

    Greg…
    You’re pathetic. You make your point, I chop it up, so did mopenshaw, and then like some moron you say”only joking”
    The mets thing is a terrible comparison, obviously hes doing what hes best at.
    Like I said , as a priest you probably believed more in the tooth fairy at one point in your life than you did God..

    Opit, wrong links, but I wont apologize.
    You live in Canada, not here. So I shouldnt really have to explain squat to you
    You asked for numbers , I gave you 911 first.
    But since you insist on being baby sat, I’ll explain it to you
    Since September 11, the economy hasn’t suffered a single down quarter. In fact, it has had 23 straight quarters of economic growth. (And despite the subprime mortgage crisis because of those idiots taking out ARMs, this is likely to be the 24th straight quarter of growth.) Those numbers are especially amazing when you consider that when the terrorist attacks happened, the Internet stock bubble was in full implosion mode. The economy dipped in the third quarter of 2001 and was slightly black in two of the previous four quarters.

    And it’s been nothing but growth since then. Overall, the American economy is, adjusting for inflation, $1.65 trillion more than it was six years ago. To put that gigantic number in some perspective for you, the U.S. economy has added the equivalent of five Saudi Arabias, eight Irans, 13 Pakistans, or 15 Egypts, depending on your preference. And while 9/11 did cause the stock market to plunge, the Dow is 37 percent higher than it was on Sept. 10, 2001, creating trillions of dollars of new wealth for Americans. What’s more, the unemployment rate is 4.6 percent today vs. 5.7 percent back then. Not bad at all. Wouldnt you say ?

    Not bad at all, indeed. Six years ago I expected the 9/11 attack to turn the Clinton recession into a full-blow economic disaster, but instead we got a strong recovery, with balls.

    I BLAME THE BUSH TAX CUTS ! and Bush’s ballsy leadership in the face of the Islamist threat – for the economy’s rebound after 9/11.

    By the way, more good news Opit: All that economic growth makes America more and more able to fund fighting the war on terror, and people with bullseyes on their foreheads.

    This here will tell you how tax breaks work (DUH)
    http://gersonpreston.com/news/insights/september11.html

  47. opit says:

    Thank you. I’m so sorry to trouble you to make a reply that doesn’t sound like a baby’s mewling – and that says what you want it to.
    Now if you could help me find that Islamist threat – in Iraq especially. Since al Qaeda – a CIA owned group – hid in the Pakistan border and escaped nothing has made sense : least of all Bushnomics. Unless the stolen Iraqi oil is worth more than the costs. See ? I get it.

  48. greg says:

    micky 2 said,

    “Greg…
    You’re pathetic. You make your point, I chop it up, so did mopenshaw, and then like some moron you say”only joking””

    For the last few days I was thinking, hey, micky2 is lightening up a bit. Something must be going on. Glad to see you’re back to your usual self.

    Bill is indeed doing what he’s best at, and doing quite well. But it sure isn’t journalism.

    “Like I said , as a priest you probably believed more in the tooth fairy at one point in your life than you did God.”

    You’re probably right, but I’ve been really trying to figure out just what in the world your point is here.

  49. micky2 says:

    Greg, my point is that your beliefs are better than what they used to be, so is O’Relliys journalism, since he gave up baseball. If you were truly joking , there are better ways to convey humor online that you could of used 🙂
    I lighten up when people don’t act stupid and don’t make wild off the chart remarks full of nonsense out of sheer spiteful hatred or irrelevant venting.
    Like this fellow Opit , if you’re offended by the word a@@ don’t go there
    (see here) > http://www.bloomington.in.us/~wh2t/DonkBoy-KK9G-Dan_files/assclown_1.jpg

    Opit I know its really cold up there right now and you probably just cant find anything better to do than to run around your keyboard and act like a fool. Just by engaging you for the last 24 hours shows that us Americans have great tolerance for less fortunate’s and an incredible sense of humor. Which you should be grateful for seeing as how you are probably snowed in and holed up in your grandmothers basement right now and your visa/mc has been maxed out so your last source of amusement is to come over here and break verbal wind (farting through your mouth) by saying incredibly stupid sh*t like “Now if you could help me find that Islamist threat ” and “hid in the Pakistan border and escaped nothing has made sense”

    Quite frankly dude, it looks like very little in this world makes sense to you.
    I will pray for you, but God forgive me if I break in the middle of my prayer and roll on the floor and laugh my ass off before even mentioning your name to him.
    Oh… its starting already, I haven’t even put my hands together yet.

  50. opit says:

    10-4 Bwana. Yesss BAAAS. Chickenshit. All you can do is degrade. Not debate.

  51. micky2 says:

    opit said,
    December 2, 2007 at 8:55 am

    “10-4 Bwana. Yesss BAAAS. Chickenshit. All you can do is degrade. Not debate”

    (1) “Saying one is for ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ while decrying balance and accountability means one can mouth the words without understanding them.”
    ( he is referring to Eric’s inability to understand these things)

    (2) “Anti-war ? At least have the honesty to call it what it is : target practice.”
    ( This is degradation through the insinuation that we shoot people for practice)

    (3) “From the standpoint of most here I’m a flamin’ commie – which would be hysterically funny were it not so stupid.” (trust me dude, you’re funny )

    (4) ” Cutting tax while spending like there’s no tomorrow to fund mercenary armies partly owned by the Prez and Vice.”
    ( He is calling our entire armed forces “mercenaries” on private payrolls. Which implies that our brave soldiers are not patriotic and that they are just for hire.)

    (5) ” I’m so sorry to trouble you to make a reply that doesn’t sound like a baby’s mewling – and that says what you want it to.”

    Some things just dont deserve debate Opit, plain and simple.
    Would you like to debate which side of the earth we live on ?
    Or to ask the question more accuratley for your reference”which part?”
    Or maybe discuss the posibilties of the sun rising in the west ?

  52. opit says:

    Oh, I don’t have any problem with idealistic young men risking their hides for their country. How to do that on the other side of the planet is always a head scratcher : none more so when sent for reasons described by liars who would make Madison Avenue blush. The old draft dodgers in AWOL’s pack who lead them and hire ‘contractors’ at multiples of their pay and screw them when/or if they make it back are a different matter.

  53. micky2 says:

    Opit wrote;
    “Oh, I don’t have any problem with idealistic young men risking their hides for their country. How to do that on the other side of the planet is always a head scratcher : ”

    Catch a plane. But I doubt security would let you near the airport. Buy a toupe`
    Or you could put one of those waisted socialist squirrels on your head after you scratched away all your hair. I suspect that if you are any more than 12 years old your scalp should be be in shreds by now.
    See here> http://www.coolslice.com/uploaded_images/normal_Animal%20Drunk%20(Squirrel%20Bud)-765982.jpg

    Opit wrote;
    none more so when sent for reasons described by liars who would make Madison Avenue blush.
    You really need to ease up on the chemicals dude.
    See here> http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/n_jenkem.htm

    Opiy said;
    “The old draft dodgers in AWOL’s pack who lead them and hire ‘contractors’ at multiples of their pay and screw them when/or if they make it back are a different matter.

    The matter involved is reflected in the link above, have a nice day 🙁

  54. micky2 says:

    Opit ! The link for your thinking cap seems to of obtained a mind of its own, that has been popular in this country. To help you with your skull cap you might want to try here also.

    http://www.funny-city.com/photos/drunk_squirrel.shtml

  55. opit says:

    Hair is down all right. What’s left is pretty white.
    Adios. Time to stop teasing the animals.

  56. micky2 says:

    Aww, I feel like the cat that had his dead mouse taken away from him.
    Wont you let me swat your limp carcass around somemore ?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.